Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 00:01:01 +0300 (EET DST)
Subject: Rere: dialectics


Well, Hugh

you surely digged points up of my hasty remarks! Guess I had basically
in mind just that 'genuinely' philosophical 'academic' studies on some
long ago dead philosophers have usually been philologically well
informed. Or another example - comparative philosophy, where issues
are such as "conception of time in Peirce and in old Swahili
narratives": quite hard to understand eastern African conception of
time without trying to consider in concrete context of ordinary life?
(That may be poor example again)

> The other is the importance of the actual words used for understanding the
> concepts involved. I'm becoming more and more of a purist in this matter,

Should we conclude that it's finally more pragmatic for communication
that we restrict our discourses to laconic messages? No more funny,
say, Deleuzian 'transgressions'? Ehh..? Just dry, clear sentences. -
Slavoj Zizek dismisses the idea that we should not throw masks away or
to try express some supposed inner fundamental self, because it
easily leads into 'chaos' or some other negative phenomenon. Social
masks ('posing') has its reasons, so to speak, according to him. I
kinda liked that. Keeping distance with socially recognised masks,
sort of interactive formalism, might provide some predictability (in
a world of more and more intensive social relations) if it works?
Don't know... Sounds somewhat conservative, too?

Jukka



     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---